Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

If it doesn't fit anywhere else, it goes here.

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by Natsu » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:47 pm

R2D2 wrote:That was a joke. a very obvious joke. don't try act all innocent pretending "lol i dumb and do not know dis" because I know you quite well, Isatis.

Isatis? What? Also, as you can see it wasn't that obvious that you were joking, the more you know.

R2D2 wrote:again, it's a joke. if my post wasn't obvious, then maybe those that followed were.

Who followed what exactly?

R2D2 wrote:The irony of that post, Natsu, is that you're now targeting me, and misinterpitating.

Targeting you you say? That's quite funny, since you're assuming I am targeting you just because I disagreed with some of your actions, which let's be honest there were good enough reasons for me to disagreed with them. And there's nothing I or you can do if I misinterpretate what you say, it's not like I do it on purpose, and again, you have never specified that post of yours was a joke. Also
R2D2 wrote:and I assume that you are doing this on purpose, because i never said that just because it's Joey means it's invalid.

AquaAdminShelly has a point, you have no right to criticize Joey for something you just did hours ago. Besides, it's kind of tiring to repeat myself but if the staff makes a post to enforce the rules said post isn't useless, it serves a purpose which is to enforce the rules. Drop it with that absurd belief of yours that when Joey or any staff member makes a post to enforce the forum rules it's bound to be useless already. It's annoying and false.

Who is misinterpreting now?
R2D2 wrote:you guys do it here, too. it's a stupid rule and it also defines being a hypocrite QUITE well.

I assume you're referring to this rule:
SPOILER:
"2. Please refrain from posting meaningless or nonsensical threads or posts. All posts should have something relevant to contribute to the thread. Original posters in each thread will have permission to ask, in general terms, for people to remain on topic in their original post, and will be encouraged to report posts that do not respect this. If you want this rule to be enforced more directly in your thread, please say so in your original post.
- While the expectation that "all posts should have something relevant to contribute" (as seen above) will be generally encouraged, we will be more strict when dealing with posts of little or no constructive contribution in particular when they are reviving a thread that has not been posted in for several days, or if this behaviour is repeated across multiple threads.
"

If that's the case read carefully, because here says very clearly that the rule shall be enforced only if the author of the thread where the 'meaningless' posts were made wants so.
Deleting a post doesn't delete an action,
if you did something wrong it shall remain as something you did wrong.
This also applies to sheets of paper, if you wrinkle them,
they won’t go back to it’s previous state no matter what you do.
While that is reality, you can compensate it being better,
not everything is lost, nothing is lost to begin with.
Do everything you can to become a better user, it’s not too late!
User avatar
Natsu
Amazing Flying Hammer Bro.
Amazing Flying Hammer Bro.
 
Posts: 4197
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 5:02 pm
Location: Uruguay

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by Knux » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:53 pm

Isatis? What? Also, as you can see it wasn't that obvious that you were joking, the more you know.


What kind of response is that?

And Isatis, by the way, is one of AquaAdminShelly's many names.

Who followed what exactly?


Those who replied to my posts saying not to make a useless post.

The point of the joke was to show that the responses to useless posts are made by, ironically enough, useless posts.

Targeting you you say? That's quite funny, since you're assuming I am targeting you just because I disagreed with some of your actions


This is EXACTLY what you accused me of when I brought up the useless post rule.

Joey or any staff member

Who is misinterpreting now?


You're just making this confusing now.

If that's the case read carefully, because here says very clearly that the rule shall be enforced only if the author of the thread where the 'meaningless' posts were made wants so.


these words are just mumbo jumbo. i think what you mean is the rule only applies when the author feels that his topic has been derailed? if that's so, then why do other members not including the author do it?
Image
User avatar
Knux
Permabanned
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 1:20 pm

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by Natsu » Tue Jan 27, 2015 2:07 pm

R2D2 wrote:
Isatis? What? Also, as you can see it wasn't that obvious that you were joking, the more you know.


What kind of response is that?

I could ask you the same but you probably will just avoid the question. Heck you might even avoid what I'm going to say by trying to imply that I'm avoiding you too. Anyway, your joke wasn't obvious, that's all you need to know.

R2D2 wrote:And Isatis, by the way, is one of AquaAdminShelly's many names.

Was it? I don't remember that much, but thanks for reminding me.

R2D2 wrote:
Who followed what exactly?


Those who replied to my posts saying not to make a useless post.

The point of the joke was to show that the responses to useless posts are made by, ironically enough, useless posts.

I think this is the right moment to say this, what kind of response is that? So useless posts make more useless posts?

Anyway, assuming you mistyped what you truly meant all I'm going to say is that it depends on the posts we're talking about. Your posts were clearly useless, served no purpose, and proved you did what you wanted to show the rest were doing. That's the same as playing outside and getting dirty, but just because everybody else went to play outside too and did get dirty it as well they are the ones to blame for following your example. That is not how it works.

R2D2 wrote:
Targeting you you say? That's quite funny, since you're assuming I am targeting you just because I disagreed with some of your actions


This is EXACTLY what you accused me of when I brought up the useless post rule.

You're making no sense right now, you might want to reconsider re-phrasing your post and bringing some examples of what you're trying to say here.

R2D2 wrote:
Joey or any staff member

Who is misinterpreting now?


You're just making this confusing now.

Maybe because you put Joey's name on bold letters instead of the words I put in bold letters? You can check them out in the fixed quote I used to answer you right above this phrase.

R2D2 wrote:
If that's the case read carefully, because here says very clearly that the rule shall be enforced only if the author of the thread where the 'meaningless' posts were made wants so.


these words are just mumbo jumbo. i think what you mean is the rule only applies when the author feels that his topic has been derailed? if that's so, then why do other members not including the author do it?

Shouldn't the answer be as clear as water to you by now? They do it because the author never asked for such thing and so they have free will to let their own threads derail. They have no problem with it whatsoever and so the rule is not enforced. Then again, if in somebody's thread that had its own topic gave birth to another topic that had no other purpose but to provoke an endless debate spreading nothing but hatred and we deem it wrong we have the right to take action. That's how things work.
Deleting a post doesn't delete an action,
if you did something wrong it shall remain as something you did wrong.
This also applies to sheets of paper, if you wrinkle them,
they won’t go back to it’s previous state no matter what you do.
While that is reality, you can compensate it being better,
not everything is lost, nothing is lost to begin with.
Do everything you can to become a better user, it’s not too late!
User avatar
Natsu
Amazing Flying Hammer Bro.
Amazing Flying Hammer Bro.
 
Posts: 4197
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 5:02 pm
Location: Uruguay

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by Knux » Tue Jan 27, 2015 2:55 pm

I could ask you the same but you probably will just avoid the question. Heck you might even avoid what I'm going to say by trying to imply that I'm avoiding you too. Anyway, your joke wasn't obvious, that's all you need to know.


...

Can anyone else make sense of this?

I think this is the right moment to say this, what kind of response is that? So useless posts make more useless posts?


When are you going to drop your ego and admit that you don't have a clue what is going on around you? I seriously don't mean to offend you when I say this but you just talk a load of crap that doesn't make any sense. Do you EVER proof-read before you post anything? You're trying to ignore my point by creating ANOTHER argument.

Anyway, assuming you mistyped what you truly meant all I'm going to say is that it depends on the posts we're talking about. Your posts were clearly useless, served no purpose, and proved you did what you wanted to show the rest were doing.


what

I made those posts, along with the rest, as a joke and REFERENCE and to PROVE that the way staff respond to useless posts are equally useless, and you're making a debate out of it.

You're making no sense right now, you might want to reconsider re-phrasing your post and bringing some examples of what you're trying to say here.


My posts probably don't make sense to you because I myself don't understand what you are saying, and trying to translate them just baffles me.

Maybe because you put Joey's name on bold letters instead of the words I put in bold letters? You can check them out in the fixed quote I used to answer you right above this phrase.


OK, i put joey's name in bold because you were trying to justify Joey being separate from the staff team. Most of the staff do the useless post thing, Joey included.

Shouldn't the answer be as clear as water to you by now? They do it because the author never asked for such thing and so they have free will to let their own threads derail. They have no problem with it whatsoever and so the rule is not enforced. Then again, if in somebody's thread that had its own topic gave birth to another topic that had no other purpose but to provoke an endless debate spreading nothing but hatred and we deem it wrong we have the right to take action. That's how things work.


Natsu,

gonna give you some serious sound advice here mate

stop arguing. nothing you say makes any sense to anyone, and Joey and I both agree that you word things poorly.
I'm sure you have a valid point, but you have a terrible way of expressing yourself, and you should really try and improve that.
Image
User avatar
Knux
Permabanned
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 1:20 pm

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by Spinda » Tue Jan 27, 2015 3:01 pm

R2D2 wrote:stop arguing. nothing you say makes any sense to anyone, and Joey and I both agree that you word things poorly.
I'm sure you have a valid point, but you have a terrible way of expressing yourself, and you should really try and improve that.


Nica assumptions. I for one understand him perfectly fine, and I feel like you're just pulling this to evade his point
User avatar
Spinda
Boo Guy
Boo Guy
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 6:18 am
Location: Germany
Current Project: SMB1X

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by Knux » Tue Jan 27, 2015 3:02 pm

what point?
Image
User avatar
Knux
Permabanned
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 1:20 pm

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by loljoey » Tue Jan 27, 2015 4:15 pm

Just to clarify: everybody who was in the SMBX council on December 20th, 2013 (the launch of the current SMBX forums), either agreed with what was happening or had no opinion/was inactive. The only exception was Knux.
loljoey
Boo Guy
Boo Guy
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 7:20 pm

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by AquaAdminShelly » Tue Jan 27, 2015 5:05 pm

R2D2 wrote:stop arguing. nothing you say makes any sense to anyone, and Joey and I both agree that you word things poorly.
I'm sure you have a valid point, but you have a terrible way of expressing yourself, and you should really try and improve that.

Aren't you arguing rn..

Also you make no sense rn. You either try to get out of something u done... or just keep copying our signatures. You totally unoriginal.

loljoey wrote:Just to clarify: everybody who was in the SMBX council on December 20th, 2013 (the launch of the current SMBX forums), either agreed with what was happening or had no opinion/was inactive. The only exception was Knux.

Are we talking about the staff about the merge?
<m4sterbr0s>But yeah, some people on the forums need to mature more.

Image
ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage
Image

SPOILER:
Image


SPOILER:
Image
Image
User avatar
AquaAdminShelly
Lantern Ghost
Lantern Ghost
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2014 12:05 pm
Location: One less Problem without you
Current Project: Los Garitos

Re: Knux's SMBX Analysis (Part I - The Community)

PostPosted by Magician » Wed Jan 28, 2015 3:20 am

And I'm not even going to sort through the absurd argument that just happened.

Here are a few things:
R2D2 wrote:I give up trying to deal with you guys.

The thread where I said "stop making useless posts" (which was quoted by BTB and me over and over again) was a joke and the fact you guys think we were being serious is a ridiculous thought process and IMO, you're saying that because it gives you leeway to critique me, and an exit to escape your own flaws, which you later choose to ignore. Only to focus on me.

You consistently make yourself a problem to be focused on, Knux. The way you handled the Natsu situation is just another one of those things.
For the record I didn't take it seriously at all, but the posts didn't belong there. I don't go over to forums you admin and shitpost all over them. It's just... y'know, rude?

But anyway based on your own confessions in this thread, it's not exactly a leap for one to suspect that you were (and in general are) trying to make us look bad by making our jobs more difficult. You outright admitted that this is the kind of thing that you are willing to do on page 5. Moreover, whenever you say it's easy to distinguish between banter and hostility, you miss the point and fail to realize that your banter is contextualized by your hostility in your own actions as a member of this community, both past and present. I should also mention, even if not for that, it could easily come off as an attempt at provocative satire, and not just "joking". The whole "telling someone not to make a useless post is a useless post" is not only an age-old argument, but it's an argument that you brought up previously in this thread.

As for this thread itself:
Seriously, anyone who's been around you long enough has seen a lot these same arguments before. 1) The attempted merge with NSMBX was almost two years ago. 2) The copyright thing you've brought up plenty of times before. 3) The "I have to bash every other admin in this community to make my own faults seem permissible" is yet another. These are just rehashes of things you refuse to let go.
I also highly suspect that every time you try to artificially inflate the severity of an instance of something you disagree with (rank incident), it's so you can use it as a later means to make someone look bad for your arguments in 3).

The thing with you, Knux, is that a lot of your points and notions here might seem good... in a vacuum. But when contextualized, just like your joke posts, they become something else. In some cases, contradictory. You don't like bullying but you're a-ok with blackmail when it's not a written rule. You want tighter moderation to stop bullying, but you have a hard time not insulting people on the forum and complain about having to phrase your posts with an even temperament. You complain about negative vibes in this community... you regularly contribute to them. You say the staff are hostile, but they're always hostile to you because you seek to be an enemy of every staff member of any forum that isn't yours.
In some cases you seem to seek some sort of political game because you're disagreeing with something you'd otherwise agree with except for the fact that it came from another forum. Example: Regarding your PART 6, I remember at SMBXR you were complaining about staff there talking over decisions before acting. Here you seem to think it's a good idea. It's very hard to take seriously when you're inconsistent like that.
I'd say more but GhostHawk already did a number on a lot of what you said, and I said part of what I was going to say previously.

And right now, you have six warnings and, whether it counts or not, you were already previously permanently banned at the time of this forum returning. I, and to be honest a lot of people, are just about through giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually want to help this community. Whether you're really a disingenuous person or not, you're just far too untrustworthy to tell. This topic has accomplished nothing but dredge up old arguments, publicize untruths about people and dispassionately hardly bother to justify them, and the rest of it there isn't much of anything to say about, all while you seem to have enjoyed using this forum as your personal playground on the side.

I'd say "give me a reason to keep you here" but you keep giving us too many reasons not to. Please don't evade the ban again.

I'm not going to do anything to this thread but lock it. It will remain, and my opinion aside, people will be able to take it for what it is (though I'm sure you'll want to post a streamlined version elsewhere). If people want to bring parts of this thread to light in the future if it happens to become relevant to how we've been managing the forums at NSMBX, that's fine.
User avatar
Magician
Lakitu
Lakitu
 
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 3:55 am

Previous

Return to Other Business

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests